This policy note summarizes Working Paper 29 (Ochieng et al., 2019), which investigates the SCP of Malawi’s maize market during the 2018/19 main marketing and lean seasons and provides policy suggestions on how to improve Malawi’s maize marketing system.

Seasonal analysis of the structure, conduct, and performance (SCP) of markets for staple crops has received relatively little attention in food policy analysis yet it has important implications for food and nutrition security. This study employs a mixed methods approach to analyze the SCP of maize markets in Malawi in the 2018/19 main harvest and lean seasons. We interviewed 749 traders from 74 markets across 8 districts, held 28 focus group discussions (FGD) with a total of 480 farmers and analyzed daily and weekly price data from 13 regional markets. The structure of maize markets was explored by examining marketing channels, barriers to entry and the competitiveness of different tiers of the marketing chain. Inequality in sales revenues, switches in trader types between seasons, quality and weights standardization, and the behavior of traders were used to examine market conduct. Performance was assessed by examining traders’ costs and margins, and the spatial and temporal integration of maize markets. We find that Malawi’s maize market is pyramidal in structure and highly competitive at lower tiers of trade but ‘oligopolistic’ at higher tiers. The market channels vary across seasons with switches between trader types and instances of rural-urban trade reversals. There is considerable inequality of sales revenues among traders of similar capacities, and a widespread lack of structured trading despite existing institutions. A high ratio of marketing costs to revenue suggests marketing inefficiencies. Malawi maize prices were highly seasonal and more volatile than neighboring countries. In contrast to previous studies, our findings show weak spatial integration of markets and slow price adjustments to long-run equilibrium values even among short-distance market pairs. The study highlights five pathways to improving Malawi’s maize marketing system: (1) increased policy predictability to promote private-sector investment; (2) institutionalization of quality grades and standardization of weights and measures; (3) increased commercialization of smallholder maize production; (4) investment in enabling infrastructure; and (5) the promotion of structured trading.

The Monthly Maize Market Report was developed by researchers at IFPRI Malawi with the goal of providing clear and accurate information on the variation of maize prices in selected markets throughout Malawi. The reports are intended as a resource for those interested in maize markets in Malawi, namely producers, traders, consumers, or other agricultural stakeholders.

Primary agricultural cooperatives in Malawi, in contrast to other farmer-level organizations, have legal status and can own assets, borrow money for their operations, and sign contracts, making it easier for them to do business for the profit of their members. Conceptually, such cooperatives enable their member-farmers to achieve economies of scale for their commercial activities. By joining together in a cooperative, members can obtain commercial inputs at lower prices closer to wholesale prices than if they purchased the inputs as individuals. In selling their output, by aggregating their crops and other products into larger lots that the cooperative then negotiates to sell on their behalf, buyers can achieve greater efficiency in buying from them and can be expected to offer a premium over the prices that they would offer farmers selling those products individually. Cooperatives can also serve farmers in providing an important channel for obtaining information and advice to increase their productivity and the profitability of their farming. Moreover, by joining together to achieve common objectives in primary agricultural cooperatives, member-farmers can exercise greater influence on local and national policy issues of concern to them, while also building social cohesion, solidarity, and trust within their communities.

This paper presents a model of the Malawi maize commodity market that is developed for use as a policy analysis tool. The model captures national and local maize market dynamics and the linkages existing within the maize market in the country. This research has been undertaken in order to provide policy makers with a robust tool which can be used to simulate the impact of policy changes on markets and households. Such a tool ensures the availability of evidence for informing food and agricultural policies. The model is a multiequation partial equilibrium model of the national maize market in Malawi. It is developed and linked in a top-down unidirectional manner to the local maize economy via a price linkage equation. A nonbehavioral arithmetic microaccounting approach is used to estimate rural household incomes that are linked to the local economy, through which macroeconomic-level maize price changes transmit. The model can be used as a tool for analyzing the impacts of macroeconomic and agricultural policy changes on the maize industry as well as on rural households that rely on maize. The novelty of the model is that it takes into account the interrelationships between farm/household, local-economy, and national maize market prices, as well as economic theory and existing empirical evidence, to build a framework that is capable of linking to the macroeconomy rural subsistence households that are traditionally deemed to have few or no backward and forward linkages.

Many rural producer groups face poor management practices, low productivity, and weak market linkages. An information and communication technology (ICT)-based intervention bundle was provided to producer groups to transform them into ICT hubs, where members learn about and adopt improved management practices and increase their productivity and incomes. The intervention bundle includes phone messages and videos, promotion of the call center/hotline, and facilitation of radio listening clubs and collective marketing. The study, a cluster-randomized controlled trial, randomly assigned 59 groups into treatment groups and 59 into control groups. After 18 months of interventions, results show positive but small impact on crop sales (USD65 per household) and no impact on productivity. The income effect was mainly from Kasungu and Nkhota-kota, which experienced increased production and sales of rice, soybean, and groundnut and received higher prices due to collective marketing. Farmers in Kasungu and Nkhota-kota improved a few agricultural management practices, while farmers in other districts did not improve their management practices. Results show more farmers accessing phone messaging on agriculture and markets, greater awareness and use of the call center, more listening groups established, and more farmers—especially women—joining these groups. Nevertheless, coverage and uptake remain very low, which are likely reasons for the limited impact.